Editorial: Parties still risk a split

Photo / File

You may or may not remember Ralph Nader, a contender in the US presidential elections from 1996 to 2008.

In 2000 Nader, on a Green Party ticket, took nearly 3 million votes, nearly 3 per cent of the popular vote in an election primarily fought out between Republican George W Bush and Democrat Al Gore.

The election was notable for its close result. After much litigation over recounts and a contentious Supreme Court decision, Bush took Florida and won the election by a slim margin. Overall Bush actually received half a million fewer votes than Gore, but that's not how American elections are won.

Nader was, of course blamed for distracting left-leaning voters from the Democratic candidate. Later reports showed how Nader basically gifted Florida and New Hampshire to Bush, costing Gore the presidency and changing the course of history. (For example, Bush won Florida by just over 500 votes, while Nader received nearly 100,000 votes).

I thought of the Nader situation after the weekend's election - in particular the Napier and Waiariki results.

In Napier, Labour's Stuart Nash was returned to Parliament, after three years in the wilderness, with more than 14,000 votes.

His main opponent, National's Wayne Walford, took more than 10,000 votes, but you have to wonder what dent high-profile Conservative candidate Garth McVicar would have made. He received more than 7000 votes.

In the Waiariki election Maori Party leader Te Ururoa Flavell received nearly 8000 votes while Labour's Rawiri Waititi received nearly 5000 and Mana Movement candidate Annette Sykes received nearly 4500. Given the margin it's hard to argue with Mr Flavell's popularity and mandate, but Ms Sykes has a point when she says having two left-wing candidates was a poor strategic decision on the part of the left. If they'd wanted the Maori Party out of government, it would have made sense to stand one candidate down, though that's asking a lot of two separate parties and they'd risk voters instead turning to Mr Flavell.

In the end it's we, the voters, who have final say, split votes or not, and it's up to the candidates to win enough votes outright to avoid these situations.